note
mt2k
Actually... the power to silence a user in the chatterbox *does* exist. I would know! Now I am not saying it was unfair that I have been silenced out a few times (since it has only happened when I had been using html in the CB), but I do agree that this great power should be used in a very limited fashion. As [mischief] said, we already have the /ignore feature...<p>
And by the way, the disappearing CB input box does disappear when you are silenced (or "borg"ed as they say). And yes, [tye] has the power to do this. And yes, it is a complete silencing from the chatterbox, because using a different client than the CB will not allow you to post either (such as fullpage chat or framechat).<p>
So in conclusion:<br>
<ol>
<li>Yes [mischief], you were exluded from chat for a period of time.
<li>Yes, chances are it was [tye] who did so.
<li>Yes, it was maybe unfair (but since I was not around at the time, I cannot judge solidly).
<li>Yes, the /borg feature is useful during extreme measures, such as me (well not anymore, but it had been useful I suppose ;) ) but on the other hand, /ignore exists for this very reason! Just because one higher-level monk does not like what someone in the CB is saying, should not give them the right to silence that person. What one higher-level monk may find annoying/offensive, another monk might want to discuss, but if that higher-level monk excludes that user from chat, then that conversation cannot take place!!
<li>All in all, I do not believe the /borg feature should exist. In a post from a while back, this entire feature was discussed. One suggestion was to make it so that if a certain number of monks /ignore'd a specific user, then an automatic borg should take place. That's what I am agreeing with right now. It should not be in the hands of one person, but those of many users (perhaps 5?)!
</ol>
178199
178199